Accies World

The top tier for the 4-0 game was magic. That video of everyone singing after MAC's penalty is brilliant to see. Definitely prefer the top tier when everyone's in it. I'll go bottom if it's split, though. Completely agree about hating them splitting the support up.

Interesting result earlier with Dundee collapsing again.Two good results and we would overtake the three above us.

As for this game,we haven't beaten our neighbours for a while.They will be buoyed by their display at Ibrox(unlike our pitiful surrender)and Accies need full focus right from the first whistle.

They will fancy their chances alright -especially after our two disasters against them this season-but if we match them in effort and concentration we have players who can hurt them.


Lower tier seems the best bet-you are closer to the action and can still generate a decent atmosphere.

Tra la la la la la la

YeOldeHamiltonian wrote:Interesting result earlier with Dundee collapsing again.Two good results and we would overtake the three above us.

As for this game,we haven't beaten our neighbours for a while.They will be buoyed by their display at Ibrox(unlike our pitiful surrender)and Accies need full focus right from the first whistle.

They will fancy their chances alright -especially after our two disasters against them this season-but if we match them in effort and concentration we have players who can hurt them.


Lower tier seems the best bet-you are closer to the action and can still generate a decent atmosphere.

Tra la la la la la la

They played a 4-3-3 against rangers and it caused Rangers all sorts of problems, I will presume they will do the exact same form of attack against us. A flat 4 instead of 5 is needed, as our ''wing backs'' aren't strong enough positionally to deal with a 3 up front.

Good point tonight.

Good point, not a great performance and Daz shows he still has the total maniac in him.

Keeper was dodgy, defenders were really good, midfield were below par one and all; and Bingham was a liability albeit he appeared to being asked to play up front and left mid at the same time. We cant start with 2 strikers so the sooner we settle to 451 the better.

Still we compete in the fight to avoid relegation but we need most of that team to recover really quickly for Saturday.

Sarris was immense. Whole defence held it together well and Remi did well, one miscue with a punch that could have gone anywhere. We were second best for much of that but had two great efforts in the first half from Daz and D'Acol. Mackinnon sent off for giving an offensive gesture to a fan. Didn't know that was a straight red! Would have taken a point before it but they were there for the taking, we just aren't very good ourselves. Home form will be the key.

Happy with a point overall. First half was a good watch, but the second saw us drop off a lot. Sarris was unreal, and D'Acol's link-up play was, yet again, excellent.

Was that really a sending off offence? Players scream at linesmen and don't even get a talking to ffs!

Happy with the point.

Thought the fans where excellent last night, really got behind the team.

with 10 men for the last 20 minutes, a point seemed reasonable. D'Acol made a great pass to let Donati through near the end and thought he should have done MUCH better.
Bingham does not work on the wing, he needs to sit either behind D'Acol or on the bench, he struggles with wing play clearly. I thought Greg had a good game also, wasn't afraid to run at the defenders.
Sarris MOTM, unbelievable, guy played like a man possessed, throwing his body at everything.
Matthews REALLY doesn't fill me with confidence, seems unable to come for crosses, inviting headers. A 6'4" keeper who can use his hands, should not be getting beaten in the air for challenges. If Motherwell weren't so shit at finishing, they could have had a few.
How the fuck that linesman managed to see Daz throw a sly finger up at that exact moment, I'll never know. ALSO, should have been a YELLOW. Club apparently will not appeal this decision though. So our player of the season has ANOTHER 2 game ban.

Good point

defending of cross balls is still horrific and needs to be addressed.

H9crx wrote:Good point

defending of cross balls is still horrific and needs to be addressed.

And you know this, how?

I don't know what folk are basing the criticism of Matthews on. From the highlights up on pie and Bovril, Matthews does nothing wrong apart from the miscue I mentioned earlier. The one at around 5.40, he has about five players jumping in front of him but he has to try to punch it. Very difficult. I thought he had a good game but I'd rather Woods. He's our keeper and has been very competent. Bigger physically too. Matthews doesn't look 6ft 4 btw and is thinner than Woods.

Just checked, it seems he's 1.84m, which is a fraction over 6ft. I think that's wrong too, often players heights and weights stay the same in their stats from their late teens. I'd have said 6ft 2.

There's very clear video of the clearance by D'Acol on the match highlights video on the Motherwell website.
It was a goal.

Stevie Clarke wrote:

H9crx wrote:Good point

defending of cross balls is still horrific and needs to be addressed.

And you know this, how?

I don't know what folk are basing the criticism of Matthews on. From the highlights up on pie and Bovril, Matthews does nothing wrong apart from the miscue I mentioned earlier. The one at around 5.40, he has about five players jumping in front of him but he has to try to punch it. Very difficult. I thought he had a good game but I'd rather Woods. He's our keeper and has been very competent. Bigger physically too. Matthews doesn't look 6ft 4 btw and is thinner than Woods.

Just checked, it seems he's 1.84m, which is a fraction over 6ft. I think that's wrong too, often players heights and weights stay the same in their stats from their late teens. I'd have said 6ft 2.

I've stood next to Matthews in the gym, he's TALL. I can't tell you about the highlights, I watched the game live, he was constantly unable to come off his line and claim a ball on numerous occassions, I remembered him being a bit more commanding in the box, or perhaps that's just a false memory. He was VERY lucky with some of the crosses, ones coming into the 6-8 yard area he was nowhere near and should have been. Our weakness for 2 seasons has been crosses, we NEED a keeper who can come out and get physical, claiming aerial balls. Need to make teams fire in less deep crosses.

I watched the game live too. Some fans have unrealistic expectation of what should be a keeper's ball, I've seen it over and over.

Gilbaldo, the highlights don't show that it was a goal. I think we can agree that most of the ball was over the line. I remember an incident from the English Premier a while back where just a tiny sliver of the ball was still over the goal line and the system of course said no goal. You can't say for sure that there wasn't a tiny part of the ball still not fully over the line from those pictures.

Stevie Clarke wrote:I watched the game live too. Some fans have unrealistic expectation of what should be a keeper's ball, I've seen it over and over.

Gilbaldo, the highlights don't show that it was a goal. I think we can agree that most of the ball was over the line. I remember an incident from the English Premier a while back where just a tiny sliver of the ball was still over the goal line and the system of course said no goal. You can't say for sure that there wasn't a tiny part of the ball still not fully over the line from those pictures.

I don't think it is unrealistic to expect a keeper to be able to judge a floated cross coming into the 6 yard area and position himself to catch it, this is COMPLETE bread and butter, something Goalkeepers are coached on from a young age, anddddd especially when Motherwell's crosses were for the majority from 30-40 yards out and with no real power. I remember 2-3 times during the game, Motherwell were able to get onto crosses inside the 6 yard box, that most competent keepers should have been on top of. If you have the advantage vs a player in using your hands, he should be doing better.
I also feel that Woods has been a superior goalkeeper for us, despite Remi' penalty save-fest.

judgeflash wrote:

Stevie Clarke wrote:I watched the game live too. Some fans have unrealistic expectation of what should be a keeper's ball, I've seen it over and over.

Gilbaldo, the highlights don't show that it was a goal. I think we can agree that most of the ball was over the line. I remember an incident from the English Premier a while back where just a tiny sliver of the ball was still over the goal line and the system of course said no goal. You can't say for sure that there wasn't a tiny part of the ball still not fully over the line from those pictures.

I don't think it is unrealistic to expect a keeper to be able to judge a floated cross coming into the 6 yard area and position himself to catch it, this is COMPLETE bread and butter, something Goalkeepers are coached on from a young age, anddddd especially when Motherwell's crosses were for the majority from 30-40 yards out and with no real power. I remember 2-3 times during the game, Motherwell were able to get onto crosses inside the 6 yard box, that most competent keepers should have been on top of. If you have the advantage vs a player in using your hands, he should be doing better.
I also feel that Woods has been a superior goalkeeper for us, despite Remi' penalty save-fest.

We'll agree to disagree. I was happy with his performance, mostly, and it's very hard to judge his second half display from our vantage point. Fair enough if you think he could have been more commanding in the first half.

judgeflash wrote:

Stevie Clarke wrote:

H9crx wrote:Good point

defending of cross balls is still horrific and needs to be addressed.

And you know this, how?

I don't know what folk are basing the criticism of Matthews on. From the highlights up on pie and Bovril, Matthews does nothing wrong apart from the miscue I mentioned earlier. The one at around 5.40, he has about five players jumping in front of him but he has to try to punch it. Very difficult. I thought he had a good game but I'd rather Woods. He's our keeper and has been very competent. Bigger physically too. Matthews doesn't look 6ft 4 btw and is thinner than Woods.

Just checked, it seems he's 1.84m, which is a fraction over 6ft. I think that's wrong too, often players heights and weights stay the same in their stats from their late teens. I'd have said 6ft 2.

I've stood next to Matthews in the gym, he's TALL. I can't tell you about the highlights, I watched the game live, he was constantly unable to come off his line and claim a ball on numerous occassions, I remembered him being a bit more commanding in the box, or perhaps that's just a false memory. He was VERY lucky with some of the crosses, ones coming into the 6-8 yard area he was nowhere near and should have been. Our weakness for 2 seasons has been crosses, we NEED a keeper who can come out and get physical, claiming aerial balls. Need to make teams fire in less deep crosses.

This was not a dig at Mathews he is a very good GK no Alan F with cross balls. The defence did not deal with any cross ball well and lost out in nearly all headers in our box.

If we end up with more clean sheets then I look forward to 7 more games of not dealing with ANY crosses.